From owner-freebsd-arch Sun Jan 6 15:53:58 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from whizzo.transsys.com (whizzo.TransSys.COM [144.202.42.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 931F437B41D for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2002 15:53:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from whizzo.transsys.com (#6@localhost.transsys.com [127.0.0.1]) by whizzo.transsys.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g06NrC709321; Sun, 6 Jan 2002 18:53:12 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from louie@whizzo.transsys.com) Message-Id: <200201062353.g06NrC709321@whizzo.transsys.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Peter Pentchev Cc: Thomas Hurst , arch@FreeBSD.ORG X-Image-URL: http://www.transsys.com/louie/images/louie-mail.jpg From: "Louis A. Mamakos" Subject: Re: make(1) enhancement - an 'environment processor' option References: <20011225202925.F304@straylight.oblivion.bg> <20020106222002.E314@straylight.oblivion.bg> <20020106222342.GA76079@voi.aagh.net> <20020106233110.K314@straylight.oblivion.bg> <20020106233851.L314@straylight.oblivion.bg> In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 06 Jan 2002 23:38:51 +0200." <20020106233851.L314@straylight.oblivion.bg> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2002 18:53:12 -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > On Sun, Jan 06, 2002 at 11:31:10PM +0200, Peter Pentchev wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 06, 2002 at 10:23:42PM +0000, Thomas Hurst wrote: > > > * Peter Pentchev (roam@ringlet.net) wrote: > > > > > > > No feedback on this proposed change to make(1)? :) > > > > > > Personally I think this is something that should be handled by ports > > > rather than make; can it's functionality not be added to bsd.port.mk or > > > so? > > > > As I wrote in my reply to Mark Valentine's mail, I personally do not > > think it can be easily added to bsd.port.mk without some *really* ugly > > and error-prone code and *lots* of invocations of other programs. > > > > Everybody, feel free to prove me wrong :) > > Oh, and of course, the make(1) environment could well be tweaked outside > of the ports tree, too; for my personal use, this avoids some hassling > with different DOC_LANG, DOCDIR, WEB_LANG and WEBDIR settings for > my own playpen. Yes, I know I can set a variable by myself, I know > I can specify it on the make(1) command line; why should I need to? :) > Now I can set or unset environment variables for various parts of > the source tree without mucking with Makefiles; in short, I personally > like it. The portupgrade tool (and it's associated utilities) in the ports tree already has a mechanism to store away per-port configuration information that's used to build a particular port/package. I don't think this ought to be stuck into make, when it could probably be done as a wrapper instead. louie To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message